untjim1995

Can I nominate this for best post ever on gmg.com?

I was just thinking this, as I read your post. Lou Holtz made a living out of telling the media, "I'm scared to death of Navy..." All it was meant to be was a ploy to motivate the players and the coaches on his staff. Mac knows how important the SMU game is to recruiting, media coverage, and to the psyche of the UNT alums that actually do care about UNT Football. We will win that game...the game itself matters way more to us than it ever will to them, just because of their history and their status on the conference hierarchy.

There is no way that would have happened. They had no Miami exposure and SMU had Tulsa, Rice, and Tulane as private backers to protect their market position. No way we would have EVER gotten into CUSA with SMU there--not a prayer of it. SMU is just sort of stuck, just like UH, Tulane, Tulsa, and Memphis are stuck. They come from decent to huge markets, but they cannot escape the shadow of the P5 schools around them. They have to try and move upward on the conference ladder, but being higher on a ladder that doesn't get you to a landing spot is really just insanity. Now, if the AAC can stay strong in hoops, they can sort of make a niche for themselves--be the first non-power league that offers football still, while being a great hoops conference. If the NCAA Tournament stays the way it currently is, then the AAC will at least be able to provide those schools I just mentioned a lifeline in additionally strong revenue. This is where the first round of conference alignment seriously missed the boat--sure, football drives the bus, but basketball matters, too, just from the additional games the hoops provides, the TV exposure you still get, and the greatness of the tournament to provide even more PR for your school and conference. I think that is beginning to show now. Louisville, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse all end up in the basketball heavy AAC. TV markets now play the big role in who goes where. Ironically, the B1G is who got burned the most on this with Nebraska--yes, they have a national name, but they provide little market to sell for TV purposes for that B1G Network for the valuable in-state fee that they charge cable subscribers. Its a big reason that I believe that Kansas will be a very valuable commodity int he next round of realignment. They have a strong hoops program, they have a great academic standing by being a part of the AAU, and they have a large presence in Kansas and Missouri, which provides two states to get on board for extra revenue.

Getting back to the original topic, I think this is great news. We should always play them, every year, no questions asked. When we backed out on them last year, I thought that was something that SMU or TCU would do to us. We need to play the local DFW teams as much as possible--and by DFW teams, this is not to include Northwood, UT-Dallas, Texas Wesleyan, Dallas Baptist, etc...

Kansas has played a home and home with Rice the last two years--and lost both. I don't know if that confimrs your argument or shoots a hole in it, but Rice and La Tech have both been on ther OOC schedule the last couple of years.

I remember that Southen Miss bowl game where we tried to establish the run against them over and over and Jamario just got crushed by their speed and size in the front seven. That was back when USM was legit and would take on and beat P5 powers. I've always thought Jamario--and the rest of the program--were never the same after that game. When the Tulsa debacle occurred the next fall, it was completely apparent that we were doing good to just compete with SBC teams at that point, that the other non-AQ teams around us that we thought were peers (Tulsa, La Tech, USM, etc..) were decidedly ahead of us still. Part of what I felt the 2013 season represented to a lot of us is that we are finally at a place as a program where we have the potential to keep going upward. Those teams of 2001-2004, while being solid, were never going to get any attention from the DFW media and potential fans because of the conference at the time and the fact that we never beat anyone that really garnered much attention form those two groups. We didn't necessarily do that, either in 2013, even though the wins over Ball State, Rice, and UNLV were nice victories, but having Dan McCarney at the helm and being in CUSA instead of the SBC just gives me a lot more belief in the next few years of progress at UNT, versus how I felt during the Dickey years.

I see us at 8-5--losses to UT, Indiana, Rice, UTSA, and in the bowl game.

The other thing about playing Baylor is that they are still just Baylor. Nobody cares about them nationally, so the stigma of losing to Baylor, even while they are really good right now under Briles, is still too much of a risk to the Blue Bloods that are in other P5 conferences. Say you're a Michigan or USC AD--if we play Baylor in a series, if you win, then it its a win over Baylor. But if you lose, its a loss to little ol' Baylor...Some of those AQs saw this when they played TCU in OOC when they were still in the MWC. Those losses stung harder, even though TCU was very good. Now, TCU has the DFW area advantage more than Baylor ever will, but the same thing still applies.

Yes, they did.

You'd think so, but their fans just abhor the idea of playing us, much like TCU fans did when we played them a while back. Their superior SWC mentality just kills me, but when you are in the club, I guess you get to feel that way. Since SMU, Rice, and UH are forever booted out just like us, now they are fine with playing UNT in football...amazing how that works.

I think Notre Dame's setup is still acceptable to all of the P5. But BYU may very well have to get into the Big XII to stay in this. The Big XII might just be the last remaining lifeline for some combo of these schools: BYU, Cincy, USF, and UCF. I still think UConn is going to make its way into the ACC inevitably, too.

Its not like this is any big surprise. Hell, the networks, conferences, and administrations of these P5 schools have been greasing the wheels for this for a while now. The real question is whether UNT will still see decent fan support with this new setup or if this will knock us back to the old Fouts SLC days where we drew less than 10K for every game. I'd have to suspect that UNT still playing SMU, Rice, UTEP, UTSA, La Tech, Southern Miss, and Army would still draw better than we did when we played SFA, SHSU, SWT, NE La, NW State, McNeese State, and Nicholls State, right? Would you still follow the program closely and attend games after this happens? I think I still will. If I put up with 1-aa in the SLC, then this would still be a much better setup than what we had back then.

Don't worry about this--its not like its from a real newspaper...

I wonder if he called RV, by any chance. Oh wait, that wouldn't fit his narrative... http://www.baylorfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=277855

TCU is about to get a full dance card when the P5 just plays themselves. They are going to get invites from every power across the country. Same with Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana, Washington State, etc. These are gonna be the new G5 OOC games at Alabama, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, USC, Ohio State, etc... All that money in those p5 conferences is awesome, except when you can never do anything better than 5-7 every year because you don't get to schedule an FCS team and two G5 schools in OOC anymore (see Tech for the last 10 years).

The P5 will argue that you can always get invited if you can prove that you should be included. Translated: no chance in hell that will ever happen. If Boise State couldn't get included or UConn couldn't get included, then the rest of us have no chance.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/8/6/5976943/steve-patterson-texas-ncaa-comments Patterson represents everything that greed stands for in every way possible.

I have a suspicion, that by 2018 and beyond, schedule-wise, it really won't matter about this anyway. If the P5 haven't separated officially by then, I would expect that most of them will have OOCs that only allow G5 or FCS games to be played at their places. I fully expect that by 2018, the P5 will be its own division within the NCAA or it will be completely separated from the NCAA. To me, the NCAA Tournament and College World Series become the biggest issues for non-P5 schools to consider. If creating a Division 4 keeps the NCAA Tournament and College World Series basically as is, then I'm ok with it. We will never be allowed to compete with them on anything remotely close to equal footing, just like all other G5 schools (I'm looking at you SMU and UH). Let them play each other in a 64 team setup in football if that is what they want. Just don't change the NCAA Tournament or the College World Series. Keep us all with equal access to both. The rest of the G5 and higher-end FCS teams (think Montana, NDSU, etc..) will just have to be creative with their football division and figue out what makes the most sense for them. Make the FCS playoff system available for the G5 when the P5 are not playing their playoff.I think that is the secret that no one talks about that has a big advantage over the current bowl system. People like playoffs, they like knowing that their is a legitimate endgame, not some poll-driven two-game deal. Nobody cares about FCS schools because they are so small and play other teams that aren't well-known. BUt if we have a system in place where all the current G5 schools are in this hypothetical level, it should at least pick up interest substantially form what it currently is. And a NDSU game against Fresno State playoff game would have more appeal than a typical NDSU versus McNeese State, since no one has heard of McNeese State. Make your new G5 level available for about 65 teams, just as Division 4 will be. If you're an SMU and won't play at this level and quits football, then you have a plethora of FCS teams to step up and replace them. Look, none of this is close to ideal for us. We want so much more, but it is the cold reality that we are a have-not, always have been, always will be. A true collegiate athletic experience is one that we will continue to offer, not some glorified minor league ripoff that the P5s are going to offer, all the while throwing away the education mantra for the almighty $$$ that TV will give them. So we have to try and make that reality as pleasant as possible, if at all possible. If its not, then we have wasted a lot of time with a football program we shouldn't ahve had and UTA will look really smart at the end of all of this. But I do think that real scholarship only college football that involves G5 teams and some others is way better than the old 1-aa system. I don't think there is much to argue on that point. BUt if its the unfortunate reality we face, we are going to need to do what we can to make it as good as possible. It won't be playing schools like Nicholls State or Northwestern State (LA) in conference. It would still be playing CUSA teams or some regionally based conference with peer institutions that we should have been in for the last 50 years that politics kept us from being in. I guess we will see how it all plays out, but it seems like an unavoaidable situation that we all will find ourselves in within the next 4-5 years, if not sooner. I've said this before, but this is unavoidable for us. Its just a matter of when. We can either figure out how to compete at this level with better known teams than we dealt with back in 1982, since the G5 does have well-known teams, unlike the 1-aa fiasco of the early 80s, or we can quit. But if we quit, I sure as hell don't want to be the chancellor that has to explain why we spent $78 million dollars on a stadium that isn't used anymore, so I doubt that is the way we ever go.

Dear RV, Call Colorado, Kansas, or Mizzou and see if they have any interest in coming down here for a game. Call Nebraska and talk about a JerryWorld or Cotton Bowl game. Just try it... Signed, Apogee Season Ticket Holders who hate watching Texas Southern, Idaho, and NIcholls State

I still think the loss at SMU later in that season was worse than this loss. KSU had a full allotment of scholarship players while we only had 60 or whatever was alloweed back then for i-aa schools. And they won on the last play of the game. The SMU game was a blowout and they didn't have a full allotment of scholarship players yet, since this was their first year back from the Death Penalty. We got whipped 35-19, IIRC, at Ownby Very pathetic effort.

Wow--just wow...this just gets more depressing with each new post an what non-AQ is scheduling an AQ team at their place in the future.

I got to school just as Dennis Parker became the coach. It was clear from day one of working up there that he had no idea how to coach college football players. He always talked about Marshall beating Odessa Permian and Marshall winning the state championship...it was really just embarrassing to watch the players tune him out. Then, we hired Matt SImon, who was very talented as a coach, but he had a massive ego. Telling him an answer he didn't want to hear turned into a $hitstorm real fast. He was a train wreck waiting to happen--which finally crashed in 1997. Craig Helwig decided that he would just hire the enxt coach without even doing a search, so he hired Darrell Dickey. Both were former K-State folks. Unfortunately, Helwig looked at scheduling away games against as many powerhouses as possible as the way to pay for the entire athletic department, while Dickey believed that those games were just for the paycheck, so he rearely put together any kind of gameplan other than just running as much as possible to keep the clock going. He never connected with the few fans we had, nor did the fanbase connect with him. Even with the SBC success, it never meant much outside of the few thousand diehards in Denton. What we have in place now is light years ahead of what we have had since Hayden Fry worked here...

I think we win all of our home games, so that give us 6 wins. I think we will lose at Texas, Indiana, Rice, and UTSA. That is 8-4. Now, for my hedge on the bad side. If we have major injuries, this thing will do good to get 4 wins. But, assuming we stay healthy, I can also say this for the first time ever--there isn't one game on the schedule we cannot compete in and win, including Texas.

First game is at Amon Carter Stadiumin 2018, return trip to Columbus in 2019.

All I'm saying is that I won't be surprised if we run the ball for good yardage against UT. I think our gameplan is one that will play well against them, from time of possession to pitting our strength against their defensive weakness. Plus, I think they aren't going to score a ton of points on our defense. I may be 100% wrong and they will just massacre us like every other AQ powerhouse we play for a paycheck. I just feel like we have a decent chance to be competitive in this one, even more than we were against Georgia last year. Yes, our team last year is probably better than ours this year, but that UGa team is waaaaayyyyyyy better than this Texas team. That may not mean a thing and we will just get crushed, as usual, in this game by 7 TDs or more. But my gut tells me this one will be closer than any Longhorn wants to admit it will be. It wouldn't surpirse me to see UT win by less than 2 TDs, with one of them coming late to seal the game. Or it could be closer than that, too. Heck, if we get turnovers in this game and can run the ball like I think we will, I can actually see us pulling off the upset, too. But that's a dream scenario, too, so I am not predicting that to happen. I just think we can compete with this pampered bunch--they haven't even been to practice yet and already guys are getting kicked off the team. I bet fall camp sees more players leave, as well. That whole program has been a country club for a long time--that major change isn't going to get accepted easily. Its gonna be a rough year for them.